Analogy: Alcoholism and Homosexuality

[manualman]

Much of the modern discussion about homosexuality bothers me. It seems we are consistently presented with a false dilemma. Either:

1. They are extra-evil people not to be trusted and preferably kept at several arms length.
2. They are just fallen human beings like all of us and should be welcomed fully into the church, just as they are. Like the rest of us.

Why is this? Why must the choice be between horrible stigma or total undiscriminating acceptance? It’s not inevitable human nature, we do better than this for other human weaknesses.

Take alcoholism. Nobody actually thinks it’s GOOD, do they? But yet, there isn’t a horrible stigma attached to it either. We’ve come to a place as a society where a man can be at a party, be offered a drink, and say, “no thanks, I’m on the wagon.” At that moment, most people RESPECT him for where he is at. He’s not hated for being a weak, selfish jerk unable to control his drinking. He’s not ostracised for it. And nobody says, “Oh come on and live a little. Drink up and have some fun. It’s who you ARE!”

There are some startling similarities. There may be a genetic predisposition to both. Family upbringing seems to influence both. Personal choices play a strong role in both. It’s disputed as to whether there can ever be a ‘cure’ for both.

So why do we treat these conditions so differently? It seems to me that we need to apply what we’ve learned about how to treat alcoholics to how we treat homosexuals.

Thoughts?

 

[LovedOne]

manualman:

Much of the modern discussion about homosexuality bothers me. It seems we are consistently presented with a false dilemma. Either:

1. They are extra-evil people not to be trusted and preferably kept at several arms length.
2. They are just fallen human beings like all of us and should be welcomed fully into the church, just as they are. Like the rest of us.

Why is this? Why must the choice be between horrible stigma or total undiscriminating acceptance? It’s not inevitable human nature, we do better than this for other human weaknesses.

Take alcoholism. Nobody actually thinks it’s GOOD, do they? But yet, there isn’t a horrible stigma attached to it either. We’ve come to a place as a society where a man can be at a party, be offered a drink, and say, “no thanks, I’m on the wagon.” At that moment, most people RESPECT him for where he is at. He’s not hated for being a weak, selfish jerk unable to control his drinking. He’s not ostracised for it. And nobody says, “Oh come on and live a little. Drink up and have some fun. It’s who you ARE!”

There are some startling similarities. There may be a genetic predisposition to both. Family upbringing seems to influence both. Personal choices play a strong role in both. It’s disputed as to whether there can ever be a ‘cure’ for both.

So why do we treat these conditions so differently? It seems to me that we need to apply what we’ve learned about how to treat alcoholics to how we treat homosexuals.

Thoughts?

First of all, to drink moderately is NOT sinful. Christ’s first miracle was to make sure there was enough alcohol (wine) at the wedding feast.
It is not “disordered” or unnatural to desire to drink an alcoholic beverage. Or two.
There is no comparison to homosexuality.
The condition or inclination of homosexuality in ITSELF is disordered.
One cannot “have just one” experience - or indulge moderately - like you can with alcohol - and be free from sin.
One is a SIN - one is not. (Excessive drinking of course would be sinful)

There is no sin in “being” a homosexual person.
There is no sin in “being” an alchoholic.
It is only when one gives in to the compulsion to engage in homosexual or drunkenness that it becomes sinful.

So the first distinction you need to make is that one condition (homosexuality) is in and of itself “disordered” and the other (alcoholism) is not.

One can be addicted to food and fall into the sin of gluttony.
But it is not in and of itself (eating) “disordered.”
Same thing as alcohol.

 

[Brad]

manualman:

Much of the modern discussion about homosexuality bothers me. It seems we are consistently presented with a false dilemma. Either:

1. They are extra-evil people not to be trusted and preferably kept at several arms length.
2. They are just fallen human beings like all of us and should be welcomed fully into the church, just as they are. Like the rest of us.

Why is this? Why must the choice be between horrible stigma or total undiscriminating acceptance? It’s not inevitable human nature, we do better than this for other human weaknesses.

Take alcoholism. Nobody actually thinks it’s GOOD, do they? But yet, there isn’t a horrible stigma attached to it either. We’ve come to a place as a society where a man can be at a party, be offered a drink, and say, “no thanks, I’m on the wagon.” At that moment, most people RESPECT him for where he is at. He’s not hated for being a weak, selfish jerk unable to control his drinking. He’s not ostracised for it. And nobody says, “Oh come on and live a little. Drink up and have some fun. It’s who you ARE!”

There are some startling similarities. There may be a genetic predisposition to both. Family upbringing seems to influence both. Personal choices play a strong role in both. It’s disputed as to whether there can ever be a ‘cure’ for both.

So why do we treat these conditions so differently? It seems to me that we need to apply what we’ve learned about how to treat alcoholics to how we treat homosexuals.

Thoughts?

I don’t think most Catholics make a choice between those 2 statements. I think most Catholics say you are welcome but do not attempt to change the Church teachings to say that your sin is ok, just like an alcoholic.

 

[Ham1]

With the exception that it is possible to drink moderately, this is a good analogy and quite useful. If only people were more able to look at those with same-sex attraction as in need of support and love in order to overcome their affliction.

So the first distinction you need to make is that one condition (homosexuality) is in and of itself “disordered” and the other (alcoholism) is not.

I think you mean “drinking” here instead of alcoholism. The meaning of “alcoholism” would seem to be “a strong propensity toward excessive drinking” which, like same-sex attraction, is disordered.

 

[Fortiterinre]

LovedOne:

First of all, to drink moderately is NOT sinful. Christ’s first miracle was to make sure there was enough alcohol (wine) at the wedding feast.
It is not “disordered” or unnatural to desire to drink an alcoholic beverage. Or two.
There is no comparison to homosexuality.
The condition or inclination of homosexuality in ITSELF is disordered.
One cannot “have just one” experience - or indulge moderately - like you can with alcohol - and be free from sin.
One is a SIN - one is not. (Excessive drinking of course would be sinful)

There is no sin in “being” a homosexual person.
There is no sin in “being” an alchoholic.
It is only when one gives in to the compulsion to engage in homosexual or drunkenness that it becomes sinful.

So the first distinction you need to make is that one condition (homosexuality) is in and of itself “disordered” and the other (alcoholism) is not.

One can be addicted to food and fall into the sin of gluttony.
But it is not in and of itself (eating) “disordered.”
Same thing as alcohol.

What you say is quite limited. I am no teetotaler, and even I have to admit that there is very little “natural” in the cocktail of chemicals we spend zillions on each year; let’s just say we’ve come a long way from Jewish wedding wine! Some would argue that we are extremely disordered and unnatural to be crafting and desiring these complex chemicals which cause so much addiction.

A better comparison might be that there is something in human nature that seeks closeness with others as well as a release from the self. When the closeness is sexualized outside of marriage or the release becomes addictive, it becomes a problem both morally and practically.

You say in all caps that homosexuality is ITSELF disordered. I would argue that homosexuality is NOTHING in “itself,” merely a wrong way on the road of God’s plan, a negative and not a thing in itself. I think part of the problem is that we tend to accept the world’s definition of homosexuality, and once we do that with our counter-cultural beliefs, the uncharitable stigma Manualman talks about is hard to avoid.

 

[LSK]

As a recovered Alcoholic, may I say that there is no such thing as ‘drinking moderately’ and so, if I am interpreting the OP’s comparison correctly, what he is saying is that people (for the most part today) do not stigmatize me for accepting my disease or disorder, dealing with it properly and abstaining completely from alcohol. And while they might have compassion for me if I am not able to abstain from alcohol for whatever reason, they might not be willing to extend the same sort of social acceptance towards me, i.e have me in their home, have dinner with me in a restaurant, etc. And I, if I drink, would be pretty foolish to expect them to do so.While drinking is not a sin, and alcoholism in and of itself is not a sin, if I am an alcoholic and I know it and I chose to treat my disorder by drinking alcohol and not abstaining from it and getting other types of help, i.e. 12 Step help, psychological treatment or both, then it could be argued that I am committing a sin.
I would argue that the same could be said about someone who is a homosexual and a practicing Catholic. If they are not leading a chaste life, they are committing the sin of homosexual behavior. If they need help to lead a chaste life, we as Catholic Christians are called to give them all the support and compassion that we can through both prayer and friendship. But whether they are or not, we are also called, and it is so stated in the Catechism, to NEVER engage in any kind of discrimination against any person for any reason…for being a sinner is hardly a being a member of a minority.

Am I understanding you correctly, OP??

 

[Ham1]

LSK,

A good and thoughtful post. Thank you!

 

[LSK]

Thanks, Hammie!

Sometimes the comparisons used with Alcoholism are tough because many people do not really understand the disease…and think it is only about getting drunk. Also, we really need to read the Catechism and understand what the Church teaches about Homosexuality and the role of Catholic Christians in our dealing with the Homosexual Catholic. They have a responsibility and so do we…and for us to forget OUR role is as sinful as they forgetting their’s.

Of course, I could be wrong…

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

As an analogy, perhaps there is a weakness in the juxtaposition of the two conditions, but from the point of view of the two conditions, serious clinicians have noted some similarities.

In his book “Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth”, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover MD has a very good comparison of the two from a clinical perspective. I’d recommend it for consideration.

We should recall, though, that even the presence of an underlying pathology does not make a given act morally licit, although it can be pertinent to considerations of culpability.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[felra]

manualman:

So why do we treat these conditions so differently? It seems to me that we need to apply what we’ve learned about how to treat alcoholics to how we treat homosexuals.

Thoughts?

I place the lion’s share of blame on the homosexual/gay agenda folks. By actively seeking to normalize, mainstream, justify, rationalize, sterilize, …the homosexual affliction and corrolary lifestyle, the gay lobby groups strictly deprive the SSA afflicted person the only truly compassionate response.

Alcoholics are fortunate that their affliction is understood through the medical model of recovery as a disease – progressive, associated signs & symptoms, chronic, and fatal if left untreated. Hence, there are readily available and insurance covered treatments, family and community supports, self-help groups, and recognition of restored health and dignity in developing a recovery lifestyle.

Unfortunately, thanks to the gay agenda lobby, the SSA afflicted individual is denied and invalidated in their psychologically afflicted condition. This has severely curtailed viable research into etiology and treatment approaches, as well as often places stigma and imposes penalty/sanction on those who in true compassion seek to correctly label, embrace, accept, and offer hope to the SSA afflicted individual.

 

[vluvski]

felra, I always enjoy your posts. Thanks for that highly useful extension of the analogy.

 

[LSK]

felra:

I place the lion’s share of blame on the homosexual/gay agenda folks. By actively seeking to normalize, mainstream, justify, rationalize, sterilize, …the homosexual affliction and corrolary lifestyle, the gay lobby groups strictly deprive the SSA afflicted person the only truly compassionate response.

Alcoholics are fortunate that their affliction is understood through the medical model of recovery as a disease – progressive, associated signs & symptoms, chronic, and fatal if left untreated. Hence, there are readily available and insurance covered treatments, family and community supports, self-help groups, and recognition of restored health and dignity in developing a recovery lifestyle.

Unfortunately, thanks to the gay agenda lobby, the SSA afflicted individual is denied and invalidated in their psychologically afflicted condition. This has severely curtailed viable research into etiology and treatment approaches, as well as often places stigma and imposes penalty/sanction on those who in true compassion seek to correctly label, embrace, accept, and offer hope to the SSA afflicted individual.

What a great way of putting it - and I think you have very accurately summed up why the political activism surrounding the normalization of the homosexual lifestyle has done such harm to homosexuals in many ways. Thank you for a compassionate and loving post.

 

[Ham1]

Imagine if we had loud organized groups extolling the virtues of alcoholism…

“God made you an alcoholic. Embrace it!”

“Don’t fight your impulses, this is who you are!”

It’s pretty hard to imagine an alcoholic in that environment ever deciding to stop and get help. After all, why get help for something normal?

 

[Trelow]

Ham1:

Imagine if we had loud organized groups extolling the virtues of alcoholism…

“God made you an alcoholic. Embrace it!”

“Don’t fight your impulses, this is who you are!”

It’s pretty hard to imagine an alcoholic in that environment ever deciding to stop and get help. After all, why get help for something normal?

Oh oh oh and can we have whole television channels of programing for alcoholics? And maybe we could get Anheuser-Bush to start indoctrinating our elementary children on how to shotgun a beer, and we can read them books like “Billy has two fifths”! It’s an alternitive lifestyle! Rock on! I cant’ get fired from work for showing up drunk anymore!!! The Knights will be glad to hear this!

Bingo felra. Great post.

 

[LSK]

Trelow:

Oh oh oh and can we have whole television channels of programing for alcoholics? And maybe we could get Anheuser-Bush to start indoctrinating our elementary children on how to shotgun a beer, and we can read them books like “Billy has two fifths”! It’s and alternitive lifestyle! Rock on! I cant’ get fired from work for showing up drunk anymore!!! The Knights will be glad to hear this!

Bingo felra. Great post.

thank you both so much, this has made me laugh out LOUD!!!

When I was about a year or so sober, 60 minutes did a special that showed that people were receiving SSI checks for being alcoholics, and that many of the checks were being delivered to their favorite bar where they hung out most of the day. Well there was, of course, a national outrage. I worked in Social Services at the time and because of this outrage there was a change in the law and the people could no longer receive Social Security with a diagnosis of just ‘alcoholism’ - there had to be an accompanying diagnosis of something like depression or another sort of mental illness and there was a sort of mad scramble to help those who truly did need SSI to get ‘switched’ and properly diagnosed. Anyway, long story short, I remember saying to my sponsor at the time, “You know, I started drinking when I was 17. Now I am 36. The government owes me 16 years of back SSI!!!”.
My sponsor (a wise man - he just celebrated 18 years) just said, “oh shut up and go to a meeting, will ya!”

 

[goofyjim]

And while I still experience a degree of SSA, after many years of therapy I would like to come out of the closet as heterosexual. It’s a big step. I hope I don’t get hung by the gay rights groups.:whacky:

 

[iserve]

Good for you goofyjim! It is refreshing to hear such a declaration, which will free you from the chains of this behavior,and might have cost you eternal life. Yours is a wonderful example for others who desperately need to hear it can be done.

 

[goofyjim]

iserve:

Good for you goofyjim! It is refreshing to hear such a declaration, which will free you from the chains of this behavior,and might have cost you eternal life. Yours is a wonderful example for others who desperately need to hear it can be done.

Well, I must admit, It was a little easier to declare since I had never acted out on my ssa. Unfortunately I feel I have wasted so much time trying to look at the positive aspects of it w/o realizing that this approach would go against what my namesake wrote in his letter-it is us who allow our minds to be filled with thoughts which lead to sin.

 

[CatQuilt]

goofyjim:

And while I still experience a degree of SSA, after many years of therapy I would like to come out of the closet as heterosexual. It’s a big step. I hope I don’t get hung by the gay rights groups.:whacky:

Good for you, goofyjim. You should be proud/joyful of the work you’ve done. It is interesting that the activists declare over and over that people like you don’t exist. They have done such damage over the years…

 

[Albedo]

goofyjim:

And while I still experience a degree of SSA, after many years of therapy I would like to come out of the closet as heterosexual. It’s a big step. I hope I don’t get hung by the gay rights groups.:whacky:

I’m glad to hear it, goofyjim. If it makes you feel better about yourself, that’s wonderful. I personally think you’ve only been brain-washed, but that’s just me. I’m not trying to flame you. I wish you the best of luck in life and I’m overjoyed that you’ve worked to better yourself. I just think that if a person is homosexual/bisexual/whatever, or has SSA, it isn’t necessarily “curable.” I’m sure in some cases people choose to be homosexual, but I don’t think it’s true in every case. Apparently I’m in the minority around here.